process-deviation

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as side effects, required permissions, or state changes. 'Process' implies mutation, but the description offers no clarity on what happens when the tool is invoked, leaving the agent to infer.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, which is concise, but it omits critical context. It is not well-structured with front-loaded key information; it trades completeness for brevity, harming overall value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (4 parameters including a nested object with enums, no output schema), the description is severely lacking. It provides no information about return values, side effects, or post-conditions, making it insufficient for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already documents all parameters with descriptions, achieving 75% coverage. The description adds no extra parameter meaning. Baseline is 3, which is appropriate since the schema does the work.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Process a specific inventory deviation with user decision' clearly identifies the tool operates on inventory deviations and involves user decision. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by the specific 'deviation' resource, though it doesn't elaborate on what 'process' entails beyond the parameters.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No usage guidance is provided. There is no mention of when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or exclusions. With many sibling tools related to inventory and VM management, the absence of such guidance reduces usability.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.